Public Opinion - Conclusion

Wherever we probe in our study of public opinion and foreign policy, we
encounter frustrating complexities and ambiguities. Political theorists
and historians disagree about the ways the public ought to influence
foreign policy and the dimensions of the actual nature of the relationship
in American history. Most contend that presidents are somehow constrained
by a public that defines broad national goals and sets parameters for
action. Yet the presidents' preeminence in the opinion-making
process guarantees them almost as much freedom in the international arena
as leaders from less democratic systems. The public itself is not
monolithic. Several publics possess varying degrees of knowledge of,
interest in, and influence on foreign policy. Individuals develop foreign
policy attitudes because of exposure to events and as a result of
socioeconomic status and personality development.

The wealth of sophisticated research produced by social scientists since
World War II underscores the gaps in knowledge about the opinion-policy
relationship. Although we know much more about the origins of foreign
policy attitudes, as well as the world of the decision maker, the precise
nature of the opinion-policy nexus still eludes us. Because of the
questions raised about the meaning of the Vietnam experience for the
American democratic system, scholars and statesmen began reexamining the
public's impact on foreign policy. As might have been expected,
considering the earlier debates over this complicated and contentious
issue during the life of the republic, they have failed to reach a clear
consensus on this most important and often troubling aspect of their
unique political system.